4 ms·

I believe that most people are in favor of fixing the problems caused by the improper allocation of additional congressional representation to areas with larger

I believe that most people are in favor of fixing the problems caused by the improper allocation of additional congressional representation to areas with larger populations of non-citizens. This piece complains about the upcoming changes without going into any depth on the problems these proposed changes will resolve.

cyanydeez 26d ago
You mean the pigheaded interpretation of the constitution? Ignorance supports itself i guess.
amanaplanacanal 26d ago
That change really requires a constitutional amendment, since the relevant article talks about counting persons, not citizens.
- anonymousiam 26d ago
  So what do you make of the phrase in Amendment 14 section two; "excluding Indians not taxed."? Do you suppose maybe they were trying to limit the representation to citizens?
  - hyperhello 26d ago
    Maybe they were but the compromise they accepted was Indians not taxed, so unless there’s some pretty surprising evidence…
    - anonymousiam 26d ago
      Well, at the time, Indians (Native Americans) were the largest populaton of non-citizens residing in the country. That is no longer the case today. (There are 10 times more non-citizens than non-citizen Native Americans today.)
      - conception 26d ago
        Ok. So? Still need an amendment.
  - vintermann 26d ago
    Citizens? Surely you mean taxpayers? And through some impressive legal magic perversity, illegal immigrants in the US pay plenty of taxes. "No taxation without representation", wasn't that a phrase?
    - anonymousiam 26d ago
      The illegal immigrants do pay plenty of taxes, but how many of them pay Federal Income Tax? It's not something that you can do without a SSN.
nxobject 26d ago
I think the burden of proof's on you to show that the "changes" mentioned by TFA will do the "resolution" you want. For now -- as a working statistician who uses Census products -- we have a lot of collateral damage that impacts our ability to reliably represent the status of the United States. As well as a sh*t publication with no one's name on it, and the expectation that the Census will publish fewer and slower going forwards.
conception 26d ago
If people are in favor of changing the law they can vote for folks to change it. Until then, the government needs to follow the law - especially the highest in the land.
vintermann 26d ago
Do you believe that? Do you also believe most people are in favor of ending prison gerrymandering? Maybe they are. But that doesn't mean it will get ended. If "improper allocation" problems are selectively addressed, expect division on partisan lines.

cyanydeez 26d ago

You mean the pigheaded interpretation of the constitution? Ignorance supports itself i guess.

amanaplanacanal 26d ago

That change really requires a constitutional amendment, since the relevant article talks about counting persons, not citizens.

anonymousiam 26d ago
So what do you make of the phrase in Amendment 14 section two; "excluding Indians not taxed."? Do you suppose maybe they were trying to limit the representation to citizens?
- hyperhello 26d ago
  Maybe they were but the compromise they accepted was Indians not taxed, so unless there’s some pretty surprising evidence…
  - anonymousiam 26d ago
    Well, at the time, Indians (Native Americans) were the largest populaton of non-citizens residing in the country. That is no longer the case today. (There are 10 times more non-citizens than non-citizen Native Americans today.)
    - conception 26d ago
      Ok. So? Still need an amendment.
- vintermann 26d ago
  Citizens? Surely you mean taxpayers? And through some impressive legal magic perversity, illegal immigrants in the US pay plenty of taxes. "No taxation without representation", wasn't that a phrase?
  - anonymousiam 26d ago
    The illegal immigrants do pay plenty of taxes, but how many of them pay Federal Income Tax? It's not something that you can do without a SSN.

nxobject 26d ago

I think the burden of proof's on you to show that the "changes" mentioned by TFA will do the "resolution" you want. For now -- as a working statistician who uses Census products -- we have a lot of collateral damage that impacts our ability to reliably represent the status of the United States. As well as a sh*t publication with no one's name on it, and the expectation that the Census will publish fewer and slower going forwards.

conception 26d ago

If people are in favor of changing the law they can vote for folks to change it. Until then, the government needs to follow the law - especially the highest in the land.

vintermann 26d ago

Do you believe that? Do you also believe most people are in favor of ending prison gerrymandering? Maybe they are. But that doesn't mean it will get ended. If "improper allocation" problems are selectively addressed, expect division on partisan lines.